2006 PLP 1468 (SCMR)
AMEER AFZAL BAIG — Petitioner Versus AHSAN ULLAH BAIG and others — Respondents
| Citation | 2006 PLP 1468 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Sardar Muhammad Raza Khan and Falak Sher, JJ |
| Parties | AMEER AFZAL BAIG — Petitioner Versus AHSAN ULLAH BAIG and others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2006 PLP 1468 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2006 PLP 1468 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Sardar Muhammad Raza Khan and Falak Sher, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2006 PLP 1468 (SCMR) (AMEER AFZAL BAIG — Petitioner Versus AHSAN ULLAH BAIG and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Nazeer Ahmad Ghazi, Senior Advocate Supreme Court with A.H. Masood, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner.
- Ch. M.A. Saleem, Senior Advocate Supreme Court with Muhammad Aslam Ch. Advocate-on-Record for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 21st June, 2004.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment dated 17-7-2003 passed by the Lahore High Court, Lahore in Writ Petition No.6588 of 2003).
S. 176
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185(3)
Exhumation
Respondent suspected that his father. died due to poisoning
Order passed by Magistrate for exhumation and thereafter post-mortem of the dead body was recalled before it was implemented
Appellate Court in exercise of revisional jurisdiction allowed the application and exhumation order was restored
Order passed by Appellate Court was maintained by High Court
Legal heirs of deceased had a right to get the suspicion removed more particularly when the exhumation by itself could never lead to the involvement of someone unless the post-mortem was conducted and the report was positive
If the report would have been positive, the persons involved were required to be proceeded against
Exhumation and thereafter post-mortem were never tools of investigation which in ordinary course should not be interrupted
After preliminary inquiry, the Magistrate in his first order had found the exhumation to be justified
Appellate Court as well as High Court was of the same opinion hence any interference by Supreme Court was uncalled for
Leave to appeal was refused.
Judgment & Decree
SARDAR MUHAMMAD RAZA KHAN, J.
Ameer Afzal Baig has challenged the order, dated 17-7-2003 of Lahore High Court and leave is sought thereagainst.
2. One Muhammad Anayat Baig, the father of Ahsan Ullah Baig respondent died on 17-3-2002. The son nourished suspicion that Karam Fatima, the wife of the deceased had killed him by administering poison for a given motive. On 17-12-2002, he filed an application to the Judicial Magistrate for exhumation and thereafter post-mortem examination of the dead body. The Special Judicial Magistrate on 22-1-2003 after making some preliminary inquiry ordered the exhumation prayed for. Before that the order could be implemented, the Magistrate himself suspended the same on 25-1-2003. On account of a transfer application the matter came before another Judicial Magistrate who, on 3-4-2003 declined exhumation. This order was challenged in revision, heard by a learned Additional Sessions Judge who accepted the same and restored the order, dated 22-1-2003 of exhumation. The petitioner filed a writ petition which was dismissed by a learned Single Judge of Lahore High Court on 17-7-2003 and hence this petition.
3. We have gone through the detailed reasoning given in the impugned order and observed that the same was quite logical, fair and just. In the circumstances of the present case at least the legal heirs had a right to get the suspicion removed, more particularly, when the exhumation by itself could never lead to the involvement of some one unless the post-mortem is conducted and the report is positive. When report is positive, the persons involved certainly require to be proceeded against. Exhumation and thereafter the post-mortem are mere tools of investigation which, in the ordinary course, would not be interrupted. It may be recalled that after preliminary inquiry, the Magistrate in his first order had found the exhumation to be justified. The learned Additional Sessions Judge as well as the learned High Court is of the same opinion and hence any interference by this Court would be totally uncalled for. The petition is hereby dismissed and leave to appeal refused. M.H./A-66/SC???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Petition dismissed.